About your Search

20130101
20130131
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
a report from dhr which was led by shawn sher born and it consisted of three different thing, he gave us a timetable as to the selection, he gave us the job announcement which is to be issued tomorrow on the 1st of september which will be a matter of public record when it's issued and then he described the battery management test that candidates will be -- some of the candidates will be asked to complete and there's also going to be a supplemental questionnaire and these were questioned with input from subject matter expert who happens to be our previous secretary linda avery which i think is a good person to have input on these matters. and in terms of the timetable, the job announcement is going to be posted for a period of 45 days from the 1st of september to march 15th, between march 18th and this is a projected calendar, and march 29, the dhr with the help of the subject matter expert will make what could be called the first cut will basically eliminate candidates they feel are not qualified and will continue on with candidates that they feel are qualified or may be qualified in the
to be requested potentially through the budget. so i'm just wondering currently do you have on-site a dhr staff or do you receive services from dhr? i'm just trying to understand what your structure is currently is for human resource support. >> let me bring up our deputy director to talk about that. >> through the chair, we do have a 1244 in existence right now in the office. we are requesting an additional 1244 to deal with what we foresee over the next five years, a lot of the position-based testing that we'll have to do, which most position-based testing, each test is taking upwards of 3-5 months to dot testing and requirements for those. so we want to begin the process to begin hiring the auditors that are necessary for the growth we'll have to do for gross receipts. in addition, the large volume of staff that e'll be bringing on, we need additional human resources to just manage the hr issues pertaining to the number of staff. right now we have not been able to sufficiently meet the needs the division. >> would the intention be that they would -- because there is so much demand on t
, it will be posted on the dhr website and throughout various publications that any member of the public can e-mail staff to find out about, you will probably see it in publications you will receive, the publication will happen until march 15th and candidates who make the at least minimum requirements will be asked to take the manager's test through the department of dhr and that in combination with their application will ultimately will be what our sub-committee evaluates, the position is posting on the 1st of february, we'll be posting until march 15th, it's accessible on the web, via human resources. >> commissioner antonini. >> do you want to take public comment first and then i can carry on after that, if there is any on this item? >> are you finished? >> i was going to say that in regards to what commissioner moore has said, if the commission feels more comfortable putting the action item on next week's calendar for the 7th, i mean, i'm only asking for an approval of what we're doing and what i described in general terms with the timetable, but not any action on any final selection proce
of the city's classifications are reviewed by dhr and i know dhr did work with the treasurer's office to identify the appropriate classifications. the09 53 position, just the salary and range for that position is $125,000 to $159,000 on an annual basis. i think the information reflected in the budget analyst's report is the fully-loaded costs meaning the fringe benefits and the salaries as well. the deputy director 3 the 0 53 as i understand is the appropriate deputy director level for the treasurer's office based on their organizational structure, which uses the 0953 classification. >> if i just take a look at the high-end of that classification, at $159,000, and i'm multiply it .42, i still only get $226,000, so i just wanted to understand what the differential was. why don't we go to the budget analyst's report. >> madame chair and supervisor avalos, yes, that number in our report on page 6 in table 2 does reflect fringe benefit costs. on page 6 we report that the proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance includes funding, requests of five new positions that includes one per
process creating the position. the way you would do it and get it through the dhr process and eliminating my position. you're eliminating the other position that we have, the community position, and that's how you get your cost savings in order to have executive officer position so there is -- there is some length of time between all this occurring and putting it out for people to submit their application and all that. >> is there a process -- with respect to option two, option two would simply work by -- how would option two work? >> option two is basically lifting the restrictions on my position. when the board of supervisors created the position they put restrictions on what i could work on and do. if the board of supervisors would simply lift the restrictions i could do all of the items that the executive officer currently does. once again the clerk's office did check into this and they determined my base position can do all work that an executive officer of this body would be working on. not necessarily of any commission but the work that this commission does and do all of that w
by diane masuda and myself and dhr. that might make a lot of sense. then the timeline might be off by a day or so, but we probably could move forward fairly quickly on that if that sounds reasonable. >> we have a tentative schedule already for us on the 23rd. [multiple voices] >> i believe we have that one scheduled. to the extent this can be -- information can be disseminated to the subcommittee, there's no reason why we can't get that information to them ahead of time. we'll have to check. * with the city attorney and make sure the items are presented to the subcommittee that were discussed by the small group that met with dhr is -- can be revealed. and if there's a problem with that, we can certainly get that information to the subcommittee or to the entire committee as well as historic preservation. so, i think that would be wise. maybe we should talk after the meeting about procedural matters and i can check with the city attorney and make sure we get this information out as soon as possible. if that sounds reasonable to you. >> that is the plan. materials will be brought on the 23rd
city. first a technical point on all of this. i was under the impression and check with dhr on this that the executive position still exists but filled on an interim basis. maybe i am wrong on that but good to make sure you're correct on that from the staff's perspective. i agree bringing it back in house because the next year is going to be really big for clean power sf and some other things and we need somebody that can be available five days a week, 50 weeks a year. i mean that's really going to be important, but the main thing i want to focus on is that the advocates for clean power sf have had some concerns with the way that lafco -- when we originally set set up lafco to work on clean power sf and especially get at the beginning of 2007 and what we needed from lafco and i believe the intention we needed somebody on task for clean power sf itself that could approach the sf puc on many occasions the sf puc wasn't thinking outside of the box on this to put it politely, and we need someone, and i think we will need someone well versed in local distributive generation, th
to do the position-based testing, someone to do, you know, more work, so i have talked to dhr, and they would like us not to have a work order, but have it as the ability for us to use them if we need, but not have them balance their budget around assuming that we are going to pay that. which i think is a good idea. so that was one of the things that, you know, i mean, we are hoping that will be in a good position by the end of this year, but in the event that we aren't. then we need to have somebody working with us dedicated to us. >> >> so in terms of revenues, this is a chart that shows that we continue to see growth, especially from 2013, through what we are proposing in 13/14, the budget, we have been reporting for the current year, we are projecting a 12 percent increase in charges for service. as you know we are seeing a lot of activity and the acting director will go over the major projects later. what we are proposing is to keep to not increase the charges for service above what the projection is. so in other words, budget for next year, the same level that we are rig
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)